AZ 1902 FINAL REVISED

281
tored for personal and social transformation
(Thompson, 2020). This creates
space for students to acknowledge their
agency in shaping their learning process.
Hence, we question the claims of
the learner-centered and constructivist
approach to studio education, shifting
the focus to learner autonomy and
self-regulation.
While numerous studies have focused
on improving specific SRL components,
few have examined the differentiation
of SRL variables between
high and low achieving students in a
design studio context. This exploratory
study aimed to describe and compare
ID students with high and low achievement
levels concerning metacognitive,
behavioral and motivational SRL factors
using both quantitative and qualitative
data. This approach may help
to understand different learning styles
and delineate areas of self-regulation
that could be strengthened to support
struggling students. Based on these
aims, four research questions were formulated:
1. Are there meaningful differences
between the SRL skills and motivation
of ID students with different academic
achievement levels?
2. What are the SRL skills frequently
used by ID students with different academic
achievement levels?
3. How do high and low achieving
ID students perceive their own studio
course experiences?
4. To what extent do qualitative and
quantitative results converge?
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Participants and procedure
We conducted this study in the Industrial
Design Department at a private
university. Quantitative data were collected
from 47 third-year undergraduate
design students (33 females, 14
males). They were on average 21.2 years
old (SD = 0.98) and all were in their
fifth semester. Qualitative data were
collected in a third-year design studio
course comprising 16 students (10 females,
6 males) wanting to participate
in the study voluntarily. All documents
and conversations were in students’
native language. The data were stored
and transferred using multidigit codes
to ensure anonymity. Participants were
provided with written information, assured
of confidentiality and gave their
informed consent to participate. The
questionnaire and interviews were administered
at the end of the semester so
that students could reflect on their current
studio projects.
This study focused on third-year design
students as, at this level, they have
completed at least four semesters of the
curriculum, including four design studio
courses. Additionally, in the third
year, the focus of the studio content
moves from a general introductory
level controlled by the instructors to an
individual development level managed
by the students themselves (Uluoğlu,
2000). This more individualized studio
context helps students experience
more self-process time and allowed
us to observe the students in their approach
to design.
2.2. Materials
In this study, we followed a convergent
mixed-methods procedure (see
Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018) undertaking
quantitative and qualitative investigation
concurrently. We integrated
the results through merging analysis
and interpreted them to gain a realistic
and holistic understanding of students’
strategy use.
2.2.1. Quantitative measure: Scale on
Self-Regulation in Learning (SSRL)
The self-report questionnaire, ‘Scale
on Self-Regulation in Learning (SSRL),’
was used to determine the relationship
between self-regulation and academic
achievement of design students. SSRL
is a validated self-report scale developed
by Erdogan (2012; for the English
version see Erdogan & Senemoglu,
2016) to evaluate the SRL skills of [anonymized]
university students focusing
on their learning habits. The scale consists
of two sub-scales: The SRL skills
section covers 12 dimensions developed
based on Zimmerman and Pons’s
(see 1986) Self-Regulated Learning Interview
Schedule (SRLIS) (Erdogan &
Senemoglu, 2016) and the motivational
section covers five dimensions (Table
1). The scale has 17 dimensions with 67
items in total and is scored on a fivepoint
Likert scale ranging from ‘Never’
to ‘Always’. According to Erdogan
Differences in self-regulated learning strategies among industrial design students: A convergent
mixed-methods study